Human Population

[Delphiki]

I have posted this before but it seems to fit well here.

Sumerians Look On In Confusion As God Creates World | The Onion - America's Finest News Source

I wish I had a movie camera and a budget.

 

[AV1611VET]

http://www.christianforums.com/t7516322/Also, it's not necessarily that Chinese civilization predated the flood, it's the seemingly spontaneous boom in population a few hundred years after the flood, in parallel to the population of the rest of the world.

And let's go over this, yet again, Delphiki -- since explaining things to you guys is like trying to light a bad match.

Strike after strike after strike, until you finally give up or -- once in a while -- it'll light.

Once again:

Exodus 1:19 And the midwives said unto Pharaoh, Because the Hebrew women are not as the Egyptian women; for they are lively, and are delivered ere the midwives come in unto them.
Exodus 1:20 Therefore God dealt well with the midwives: and the people multiplied, and waxed very mighty.

 

[Delphiki]

Can you "answer" any of the other points I've made or are you just keep quoting the bible passage that you interpret as "God maded it so they can has lots of babby."

 

[AV1611VET]

Can you "answer" any of the other points I've made or are you just keep quoting the bible passage that you interpret as "God maded it so they can has lots of babby."

With pleasure:

I wish I had a movie camera and a budget.

Don't we all?

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Can you "answer" any of the other points I've made or are you just keep quoting the bible passage that you interpret as "God maded it so they can has lots of babby."

Seems them Hebrew womens likes the secks.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I'm not a mathematician but I'd like to figure out how the creation model started with 8 people and arrived at today's current population growth? Suppose we have an average rate of 2.5 children in a family, as a result that would yeild 6.5 billion (I think it's about 6.8 now) people today. But from the evolution model it is believe that humans has been around since 1 million years ago, nonetheless there must be a growth from that point, so if we assume the same rate we would get more than the number of electrons in the universe. Using the biblical number that make sense. But how do we work around the birth/death rates? Anybody have an idea? What are your thoughts on this?

If the model is based on biblical information large populations everywhere throughout history are certainly possible in relatively short periods of time. Start with three families post flood. Consider that they (at least the men) were incredibly healthy (their father was perfect genetically), that they, and their offspring, produced children for much longer periods than we do, that there were no wars in the early years and probably little disease, that Noah brought knowledge of health across the flood, and that they had large families. Construct a model where couples begin families at about age 25, have 6-8 children over a period of 8-12 years. If each newly formed couple repeats the same cycle there will be a LOT of people in a short time.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

If the model is based on biblical information large populations everywhere throughout history are certainly possible in relatively short periods of time. Start with three families post flood. Consider that they (at least the men) were incredibly healthy (their father was perfect genetically), that they, and their offspring, produced children for much longer periods than we do, that there were no wars in the early years and probably little disease, that Noah brought knowledge of health across the flood, and that they had large families. Construct a model where couples begin families at about age 25, have 6-8 children over a period of 8-12 years. If each newly formed couple repeats the same cycle there will be a LOT of people in a short time.

Factor in polygamy, and whamo, bunches of kiddos.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

YouTube - Ultimatum to Obama and all Hostiles, Surrender or Die!

To me, listening to someone defend creationism is like listening to this person in this video. I finish the video thinking, "This person must have a psychological disorder."

 

[matthewgar]

And let's go over this, yet again, Delphiki -- since explaining things to you guys is like trying to light a bad match.

Strike after strike after strike, until you finally give up or -- once in a while -- it'll light.

Once again:

Exodus 1:19 And the midwives said unto Pharaoh, Because the Hebrew women are not as the Egyptian women; for they are lively, and are delivered ere the midwives come in unto them.
Exodus 1:20 Therefore God dealt well with the midwives: and the people multiplied, and waxed very mighty.

Again maybe you can show me wrong, but that appears out of context when refering to chinese or any none jewish civilization. I love how you take verses unrelated to something and then say, "See this proves me.". Were talking civilizations with unbroken history and such, even if we allow for your idea of population explosion, you still run into problems of a civilization that focused on breeding would lose alot of otehr things, culture and such, little to no time for money being rich or anything, since everyones spending money on having kids.

But here is a bigger question, why? Why would humans breed like bunnies? we lose 1/3rd the population of the world due to the blubonic plague and we don't have everyone breeding lke rabbits to get to the previous levels. What are the two people that become egyptians thinking, "Here lets breed like rabbits so that we can start a great civilization in a few years. Just because something might be possible doesn't make it plausible. If world war 3 happens and we end up like in the Fallout games, are people going to be producing as many children as possible to get the earth back to billions of people in a few hundred years?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

If world war 3 happens and we end up like in the Fallout games, are people going to be producing as many children as possible to get the earth back to billions of people in a few hundred years?

Yes. Reproducing is in our jeans.

 

[Psudopod]

Yes. Reproducing is in our jeans.

Generally reproducing is done outside our jeans.

</coat>

 

[matthewgar]

Yes. Reproducing is in our jeans.

Yes, but what happens after we run out of jeans, the few that survived the war probably not last long, will Brahman hide pants work just as well? :>

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

Yes. Reproducing is in our jeans.

I'm guessing you don't have any kids, do you?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Is there a creationist population chart floating around in the internet somewhere?

I slapped together a couple simple formulas in Excel to see what the world population throughout history woudl have looked like having only started with 8 people (post-flood) in 2500 BCE (4500 years ago).

What I put together doesn't even account for plagues or wars or anything that would have stagnated population growth, so this should also give an advantage to the argument of the flood-believers.

In order to start with 8 people in 2500 BCE and end up with 6.5 billion people in 2010, you need a population growth rate of roughly 157.77% per century. This means that in the first century, Noah and family would only have to make the population 13 people in the next hundred years (8 * 1.5777 = 12.62). The next hundred years, the population only needs to be about 20 people (12.62 * 1.5777 = 19.91), and so on. By the time you reach 2000 CE, the formula yields a population of 6.5 billion. Everyone following so far?

Well this is fine and dandy, and seems like a pretty realistic population growth rate, except that this means there were only somewhere between 500,000 and 700,000 people on the face of the planet when the Roman empire came to be. Sounds like a lot, except the Roman empire alone actually averaged a population of about 55 million people.

Think that's funny? How about a scant 300 people on the face of the earth during the old Babylonian period. I wonder how many of these people were Babylonians? 20? 60? 100? Not a very big city.


Ok, ok. Maybe we'll get better numbers if I just add an average population per century until we end up with 6.5 billion for today. I would need to add 141 million each century. Already the problems arise. Noah and his family alone would have to supply the first 141 million people. Then, his descendants, the next 141 million, and so on.

But for 8 people to make 141 million grand kids and great grand kids in just 100 years?

Joking aside, it's clearly a mathematical impossibility that we started with only 8 people in 2500 BC, especially when you compare the known populations of cities in various periods.

You know those people that calculated how fast Santa would have to be traveling to deliver all those presents in one night? Yeah, it's kinda like that.

Why the bogus model?

 

[Delphiki]

Why the bogus model?

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Son of the King]

My thoughts exactly.

I posted this elsewhere but I do know this as a fact. When I was 14 in grad 10 the teacher said on one day during that year that the population of the world had reached 1 billion. Now 36 years later we are 7 times that at 7 billion. So using this formula that would mean that the population increased 7 times every 36 years. This increase of course accounts for all deaths for what ever reason. I have a friend who is a sibling to 17, thats a total of 18 kids from the same mom and dad. He told me one of his sisters had 12 kids and another 10 then it goes down in number from there to him who only had 3 but had a vasectomy to prevent having any more. So for an average lets take 7 kids per family. You then have 18 x 7 with a total population from one family after say 50 years of 126. Now times this by 3 becaue there were three families producing. So total now is 378. Now if the population is increased 7 times every 35 years I did the calculations for 3500 years from the population of 378 and came up with 106,775,644,122. What did I do wrong?

 

[Delphiki]

Truth is you can't put population growth on a linear or exponential scale. It's just not constant. The point I was trying to make, though, that both immediately before and after the time the great flood was supposed to have happened, there were multiple ancient civilizations with populations in the millions. This just can't be done with a near extinction in the middle as if nothing happened. Not to mention 8 people probably isn't enough genetic diversity to keep the human race going, especially if half of them are already immediate relatives.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Truth is you can't put population growth on a linear or exponential scale. It's just not constant. The point I was trying to make, though, that both immediately before and after the time the great flood was supposed to have happened, there were multiple ancient civilizations with populations in the millions. This just can't be done with a near extinction in the middle as if nothing happened. Not to mention 8 people probably isn't enough genetic diversity to keep the human race going, especially if half of them are already immediate relatives.

A conservative model of six children per family repeated every 50 years would have a worldwide population of nearly 8 billion people only 800 years after the flood. This would account for many highly populated civilizations worldwide. Regarding diversity, that was carried across the flood in the genes of Noah's sons and their wives.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

My thoughts exactly.

I meant your model.

 

[matthewgar]

A conservative model of six children per family repeated every 50 years would have a worldwide population of nearly 8 billion people only 800 years after the flood. This would account for many highly populated civilizations worldwide. Regarding diversity, that was carried across the flood in the genes of Noah's sons and their wives.

But as mentioned in the other 2-3 topics on this subject you can't get to the population of egypt/china/south america and such imediatly after the flood. We don't even have to talk about to now.